*********************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Leung Che-cheung and a written reply by the Secretary for Transport and Housing, Professor Anthony Cheung Bing-leung, in the Legislative Council today (May 6):
Question:
Recently, a number of persons from one-person households of public rental housing (PRH) have sought my assistance, saying that the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) demanded the termination of their tenancies under the relevant provisions of the Housing Ordinance (Cap. 283) on the grounds that they had failed to retain regular and continuous residence in their units (non-regular residence). It is learnt that some assistance seekers, who need to frequently leave Hong Kong for work or cannot return home from work until midnight, were unable to meet the HA staff conducting flat inspections and were therefore alleged to have committed non-regular residence. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(1) regarding the cases of alleged non-regular residence involving one-person households and non-one person households respectively, of the respective numbers of cases in each of the past three years, in which (i) HA demanded termination of tenancies, (ii) the Central Team upheld the demand after in-depth investigations, (iii) reviews by the Appeal Panel were sought by the households concerned, and (iv) appeals by the households concerned were allowed after review (set out such information in a table);
(2) as I have learnt that HA conducts flat inspections to detect abuse of PRH units, but over 90 per cent of such inspections take place before 8pm when very often the persons from one-person households living in PRH units in remote areas but working in the urban areas have not yet returned home, whether HA will adjust the timing for flat inspections, so that inspection staff can contact such households; if it will not, of the reasons for that;
(3) whether the methods and procedures adopted by HA for handling suspected cases of non-regular residence involving one-person households are different to those adopted for handling similar cases involving non-one person households; if they are, of the details;
(4) as I have learnt that HA will not demand the transfer of a non-one person household to a unit of a smaller area or the recovery of the unit on the grounds that some of the members of the households have left Hong Kong for work, but one-person households may have their units recovered for leaving Hong Kong for work, whether HA has assessed if this practice is unfair to one-person households, and whether this practice will in effect force one-person households to give up leaving Hong Kong for work; and
(5) whether the authorities will consider reviewing and enhancing the policies and procedures for handling cases of suspected non-regular residence involving one-person households in PRH units?
Reply:
President,
My consolidated reply to the questions raised by the Hon Leung Che-cheung is as follows.
The Tenancy Agreement (TA) signed between the Hong Kong Housing Authority (HA) and public rental housing (PRH) tenant stipulates that the tenant and all family members listed in the TA shall move into the PRH flat within one month after the commencement of the tenancy and maintain regular continuous residence in the PRH flat. In addition, in July 2008, HA reaffirmed the administrative arrangements to deal with tenancy abuse, including termination of tenancy against cases of proven subletting of PRH flats (with or without rental income); non-occupation cases under which tenants are staying in proven alternative accommodations or cases of not retaining regular and continuous residence in PRH flats for a continuous period of up to three months. HA adopts the same standard in handling tenancy abuse by any PRH tenants. For serious breaches, no matter by one-person household or non-one-person household, HA will terminate the tenancy without giving prior warning. If tenants cannot retain regular and continuous residence in the PRH flats due to short term employment, HA will exercise discretion in the consideration for individual cases.
In handling suspected tenancy abuse cases, Housing Department (HD) staff will adopt appropriate approach and conduct surprise flat visits according to the circumstances of the case, such as during morning, daytime, nighttime or other time slots (including Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays). However, if tenants cannot be reached by HD staff when they are working outside, they can provide proof to show that they are residing in their PRH flats and therefore have not breached the clause of maintaining regular and continuous residence in PRH flats.
Some tenants need to work outside Hong Kong and cannot retain regular and continuous residence in the PRH flats. In order to fully utilise housing resources and taking into account the needs of tenants, HA will issue Letters of Assurance (LA) to tenants who surrender their PRH flats voluntarily. If housing needs arise in the future, LA holders can submit applications to the original estate offices for redemption of LA. If LA holders can fulfill the prevailing eligibility criteria for PRH application and other conditions, they may be reallocated PRH flats in the district where they originally resided, subject to availability of resources.
In the past three years, the Central Team of HD conducted about 8 000 investigations of randomly selected or suspected tenancy abuse cases per year, amongst which non-occupation of flat was the most common type of tenancy abuse. In the course of investigation, the nature of the case may change. For example, some PRH households might voluntarily surrender their flats, after knowing that they were under investigation. Others might cease to pay rent intentionally because they knew that their flats would be recovered due to tenancy abuse. Such flats would be recovered by HA due to rent-arrears eventually. On average, there were about 650 confirmed cases of tenancy abuse per year, including non-occupation of flat, unauthorised use of flat, letting or subletting of flats or making false declaration etc. HD does not keep detailed breakdown of these cases by categories of one-person households or non-one-person households. HD recovered about 400 PRH flats per year on average through the issue of notice-to-quits (NTQ) as a result of tenancy abuse. In the past three years, some 250 cases per year on average were heard by Appeal Panel against the NTQs issued on grounds of not retaining regular and continuous residence in PRH flats. The average number of NTQs being confirmed, revised or cancelled after appeal hearings were 160, 50 and 40 per year respectively.
HA spares no efforts in combating tenancy abuse and the relevant measures have been effective. We will continue to monitor the implementation of the measures and review the measures when appropriate.
Ends/Wednesday, May 6, 2015
Issued at HKT 12:48
NNNN
